The Neurotype of Desire: Psychextrics, Justice, and the Breeding Grounds of Power
BY: OMOLAJA MAKINEE
In every civilisation, from the temples of Kemet to the tribunals of Westminster, the architecture of human governance has reflected not merely law but neurotype. Behind every institution—police, prison, parliament—lies an unspoken psychogenetic composition: a coded hierarchy of desires. Psychextrics, the behavioural science that seeks to decode the relationship between Genetic Index Marker (GIM) and Epigenetic Index Marker(EIM), reveals that desire is not a random spark of will, but an expression of underlying neurotype—genetic, inherited, and sometimes, environmentally acquired.
The GIM forms the core emotional genome of an individual—the inborn structure of their emotive and instinctual intelligence. Desires that emanate from this level are persistent, unmodifiable, and hereditary. They define the self not as choice, but as destiny. By contrast, desires that arise through EIM, the epigenetic interface of experience—through upbringing, socialisation, or exposure to stimuli—are transient and epigenetically modulable. They are learned appetites, habits, and beliefs—desires that can fade with changing environments or interventions.
This distinction between inherent and acquired desires offers a profound key to understanding not only individual behaviour, but the design and dysfunction of entire systems of justice.
Scenario 1: The Neurotype of Power and the Professional Allure
Consider the individual who derives satisfaction from control. In one person, that desire may manifest through teaching, mentoring, or leadership—a constructive expression of GIM-aligned dominance seeking order and guidance. In another, the same neurotype, distorted by acquired stimuli or lack of empathy, may manifest as authoritarianism or cruelty.
When such individuals enter institutions like the police or prison service, the system itself becomes their playground. A profession built around hierarchy, enforcement, discretion and subjugation attracts neurotypes predisposed toward control and legitimises their expression. Psychextrics identifies this as a convergence between desire and environment: the system becomes a mirror that rewards the neurotype most compatible with its operations.
A narcissistic or psychopathic neurotype—whose inherent desire is to inflict or witness suffering—may find moral justification within occupational duty. What society calls “misconduct” is, for them, a natural expression of GIM-level desire given social permission. They experience no dissonance; their personality is in harmony with the environment.
Scenario 2: Institutional Complicity as Neurotype Ecology
Institutions, like organisms, evolve around their dominant neurotypes. When recruitment and promotion favour traits of assertiveness, emotional detachment, or obedience to authority, the system unconsciously curates its own psychological ecosystem.
Take, for example, a police force that prioritises discipline over empathy and shields officers from external accountability. Such a structure does not merely tolerate misconduct—it breeds it. The absence of moral feedback loops allows maladaptive neurotypes to thrive, mutating into collective behaviour.
When officers falsify evidence, when prosecutors misrepresent facts, when custodial staff engage in deliberate neglect, they act not only as individuals but as nodes in a shared neurotype network—a culture of consent to harm. What begins as personal pathology evolves into institutional psychology.
This is why misconduct within such systems often feels intractable: it is not only behavioural but neurostructural. Reform without rebalancing the underlying neurotype ecology simply reshapes the symptoms without addressing the source.
Scenario 3: The Moral Collapse of Legal Architecture
The law itself, in its modern form, often reproduces this neurotype imbalance. Consider how the system distinguishes between harm by the State and harm by the individual.
- When a citizen kills another, the act is prosecuted as murder—a moral and legal violation.
- When a police officer kills a detainee, it becomes misconduct or civil liability.
- When a corporation’s negligence leads to death, punishment attaches to a legal fiction rather than a moral actor.
In each case, the structure of accountability reflects not justice but neurotype privilege. Systems protect their own by insulating those whose desires align with institutional maintenance. A police officer’s aggression, when expressed within authorised boundaries, is valourised as bravery; when expressed outside them, it is excused as error. The same neurotype, the same desire—context alone separates heroism from homicide.
This asymmetry reveals a profound truth in Psychextrics: the law does not only regulate behaviour; it validates certain neurotypes as moral.
Scenario 4: The Group Neurotype and Collective Desire
It is tempting to think of pathology as personal, but under Psychextrics, desire operates collectively. When a group of individuals, united by occupational purpose, finds mutual pleasure in cruelty, deception, or control, a group neurotype emerges—a shared emotional architecture that transcends individuality.
Consider a unit of officers who falsify evidence to secure convictions, convinced of their own righteousness. Their excitement, their shared laughter, their self-justification—these are not random acts of misconduct. They represent synchronous activation of similar GIM-based desire patterns, reinforced by institutional immunity. The group becomes a hive organism, reproducing its neurotype across generations of recruits.
This is why the same patterns of misconduct recur globally, across cultures and continents. The neurotype of dominance, when unregulated by empathy or moral architecture, seeks environments where it can reproduce safely. Policing and imprisonment provide precisely that habitat.
Scenario 5: The Case of Joseph Maxwell Spencer and the Path to Reform
The case of Joseph Maxwell Spencer underscores why neurotype-based reform is essential to public good. His experience, emblematic of structural abuse of power, reveals a world where systems designed to protect instead cultivate harm.
Psychextrics proposes that to achieve genuine reform, society must disrupt the occupational compatibility that allows harmful neurotypes to flourish. Professions that attract narcissistic or psychopathic neurotypes must be redesigned to deprive those desires of safe expression. In other words, the environment must become epigenetically hostile to destructive personality expressions.
Imagine a justice system that recruits and promotes not by dominance but by emotional regulation, where procedural empathy is rewarded more than authoritarian control. In such a system, maladaptive neurotypes would find no outlet for gratification. Their destructive desires, starved of institutional expression, would fall into dormancy.
Scenario 6: Evolutionary Consequence and Generational Dormancy
The long-term vision of Psychextrics extends beyond reform—it imagines evolutionary correction. Desires that cannot find social expression gradually weaken across generations. If neurotypes aligned with cruelty, deceit, or exploitation are denied environmental activation, their GIM expression becomes latent.
Within two or three generations, such traits, though still genetically encoded, lose their adaptive value. They remain in the genome as dormant cloaks—vestigial echoes of a disused behavioural past. This is how civilisation evolves morally: not through punishment or preaching, but through ecological suppression of destructive neurotypes.
Thus, the future of justice is not merely punitive or restorative—it is neuroevolutionary.
Scenario 7: The Neurotype of Desire and the Architecture of Society
At the core of this new understanding lies a singular insight: desire is the behavioural axis of evolution. Every action—altruistic or violent—traces back to a neurotype-originated desire. GIM governs those that define our essence; EIM modulates those shaped by experience.
A society that wishes to cultivate moral progress must therefore map its occupational and institutional structures against the desires they activate. Professions must be designed not to indulge destructive neurotypes, but to redirect them toward constructive outputs.
The surgeon, who channels his precision under pressure to heal, and the engineer, who finds pleasure in problem-solving—both demonstrate how inherently potent neurotypes can serve humanity when properly aligned. The same precision, detached from empathy, could birth cruelty or apathy in another setting. Hence, environment is destiny’s filter.
Conclusion: The Future of Human Systems
The modern world stands at a precipice where behavioural science and justice converge. If desire is indeed the pulse of neurotype, then institutions must evolve as custodians of collective psychology. The police, the courts, the prisons—each must become an instrument not of punishment, but of neurotype regulation.
When society learns to recognise which desires are inherent and which are acquired, which are immutable and which can be modulated, it will cease to moralise pathology and begin to design systems that harmonise human potential with public good.
Such a world—where destructive neurotypes cannot find expression—would mark the beginning of a new social epoch: a civilisation of dormancy, where inherited darkness, starved of context, fades into quiet irrelevance.
In that world, law will not merely protect; it will heal. And the science of Psychextrics will stand as the bridge between biology and justice—the key to a society where desire itself becomes ethical.
Back to 👇